Laserfiche WebLink
Nonconforming Use Variance Request – Valtinson Sign (386 Cleveland Avenue) <br />Planning Commission Report; 8-18-20 <br /> <br /> <br />Page 9 <br />(cont.) b. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to this <br />property that were not created by the landowner? <br />Staff Analysis: With regards to sign height, construction of the new <br />soundwall is clearly a unique plight not created by the landowner. However, <br />with regards to sign size, the landowner is subject to the same restriction that <br />all other properties with legal nonconformities face: the inability to expand <br />the nonconformity. Criteria not met. <br />c. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? <br />Staff Analysis: No. A sign is currently present on the property facing the <br />highway. Provided the proposed electronic display meets all code standards <br />and is not used as a billboard, character will not change. Criteria <br />conditionally met. <br />4) Is the variance being sought solely to improve the value of the property? <br />Staff Analysis: No. The variance is being sought to retain current signage. <br />Criteria met. <br /> <br />Nonconforming <br />Use Analysis: <br />Because this proposal is seeking to expand an existing legal nonconforming sign <br />(changing the sign type, surface type, and size), the additional provisions of Section <br />8-640 regarding Type 4 Nonconforming Uses also come into play. <br /> Subsection (1) is satisfied as it requires the landowner to undertake this <br />nonconforming use variance procedure. <br /> Subsection (2) states that approval to change the legal nonconforming use can <br />only be granted if one or more of the following conditions are met: <br />a) The total number of nonconformities is reduced; <br />b) The impact of any nonconformity on adjacent properties is reduced to the <br />greatest extent practicable; <br />c) The extent of any nonconformity is reduced where practical. <br />The language in Subsection (2) gives the City broad discretion on how to approach <br />this application. If the Commission wishes to deny the request entirely, it can find <br />that none of these three tests are met: the total number of nonconformities is not being <br />reduced, the impacts on adjacent properties are not changing, and the nonconformity <br />is being expanded and not reduced where practical. <br />Alternatively, if the proposed sign is reduced in size from approximately 40 square <br />feet to a conforming 36 square feet, the Commission can find the proposed changes <br />are allowable provided variance criteria are met.